Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

They didn’t ask to go viral

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 234 posts

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#21

Post by teamspirit »

laputan_machine wrote: post #12
nullindividual wrote: post #4

Social media truly is the opioid of today's society. While browsing /r/all, I ran across a post from a very popular sub which had an airport worker stripping in the airport, flailing on the floor, etc. No one knows why, could have been drugs, could have been a mental defect. Yet many of the thousands of responses were laughing because they could see the man's flaccid penis. While we don't know what caused the man to…

I often think this about Ring / permanent surveillance that exists now. Nobody can even be free in front of their own house without the threat of something ludicrous happening to you and then it being on public record until the end of the internet. It's absolutely wild to me.

That's the exact reason I just ordered a locally recording doorbell and am finally replaced the last cloud based "smart" device in my home. I found myself actually changing my behavior and not saying certain things to my wife in front of it. The thought that every time I passed my own front door a stranger, that I placed there, was recording me was nauseating.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#22

Post by spydum »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #14
roenxi wrote: post #3

The "everyone:1" ratio of internet criticism also has had an interesting effect on politics. Given the sheer amount of vitriol directed at politicians no sane person would run for election. A plausible base-case scenario is a group of socially disabled internet dwellers dedicate their life to hounding you for imagined wrongs. Let alone the pressure of making any decision in a situation where large groups of people ar…

Interestingly, the most successful politicians in recent years have adopted the techniques of old-school internet trolls. It goes like this: 1. Do or say something that's a bit edgy and controversial. 2. Pull out a lawn chair as the opposition attempts to stir up a shit storm. 3. Under no circumstances engage with the criticism directed at you, just be somewhere else when anything is coming your way. Never defend or…

completely agree with this. it's difficult, but the right answer is to ignore all media contexts and criticisms of political candidates AND their actions, and entirely focus on the ground truth of "what" they have achieved in the past, and not the "why". That seems risky, as motives matter, but there simply isn't a way to get an unvarnished assessment of a persons motives from the media (mass or otherwise). even still, there is a risk the only thing you learn they achieved is filtered via the spin factory, or what their achievements were by grift or illegal means, but what's the alternative?

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#23

Post by hattmall »

yosito wrote: post #18

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when in public. While it's certainly polite not to take photos of strangers and post them without asking if it's ok, you shouldn't morally or legally need permission. They're in public. Their actions can be seen by anyone else in public who crosses paths with them, whether online or off. There are cameras everywhere, and a random person with their smartphone should not be…

I think it's actually pretty reasonable to have an expectation of relative privacy even while in public. As in I'm obviously expecting to be seen by the people in my immediate vicinity but not by people who aren't nearby. For the entirety of human existence until it very slowly started changing with cameras, but that rate of change has accelerated exponentially in the last ~15 years with ubiquitous camera phones and social media.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#24

Post by rcme »

yosito wrote: post #18

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when in public. While it's certainly polite not to take photos of strangers and post them without asking if it's ok, you shouldn't morally or legally need permission. They're in public. Their actions can be seen by anyone else in public who crosses paths with them, whether online or off. There are cameras everywhere, and a random person with their smartphone should not be…

I think you’re confusing legal duty with moral duty. I have no reasonable expectation conversational counterparts aren’t lying through their teeth, but I have the moral expectation that they’re telling the truth. Similarly, you have no expectation of privacy when browsing the internet, but I think you would still feel an invasion of your privacy should I post your browsing history, along with your real name, publicly.

Ultimately, moral codes are about creating a functioning society. Having people feel comfortable in public is an important aspect of that.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#25

Post by tjpnz »

newsclues wrote: post #7

Part of the power of social media, is that powerful people acting badly in public finally might face some public backlash or justice. Banning this, will certainly protect the powerful, and will likely continue to be unenforced for the average person.

Whenever this argument comes up I think of what happened to Logan Paul and Justine Sacco. One desecrated what was effectively a burial site and faced few consequences, the other told a dumb joke and had their life destroyed over it. The powerful continue to thrive while the weak suffer.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#26

Post by nullindividual »

yosito wrote: post #18

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when in public. While it's certainly polite not to take photos of strangers and post them without asking if it's ok, you shouldn't morally or legally need permission. They're in public. Their actions can be seen by anyone else in public who crosses paths with them, whether online or off. There are cameras everywhere, and a random person with their smartphone should not be…

You're coming at it from a legal perspective where the platforms do not have their own rules on what is allowed or not allowed.

In the example I gave in this thread, yes the man was in public, nude, however the platform (reddit) has a rule against posting this type of content. That reddit itself doesn't follow.

> I recently had someone give me a hard time because I had posted a selfie where someone else was in the background smoking a cigarette.

Why didn't you blur/crop/etc. them out, instead?

While you're not legally nor technically in the wrong and you're welcome to argue until you're blue in the face of 'public!', (the royal) you can ask those who are in the picture if you can post it, being a kind, thoughtful, and respectful human being, or you can go "it's in public! the law says I can!". And then the rest of us can make comments about morality and respect.

And if you don't know the people in the picture, ask yourself, do I really need to post this? (hint: no)

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#27

Post by gochi »

newsclues wrote: post #7

Part of the power of social media, is that powerful people acting badly in public finally might face some public backlash or justice. Banning this, will certainly protect the powerful, and will likely continue to be unenforced for the average person.

This argument doesn't hold up in practice, because currently, the powerful are already protected. Look at how many cops got away with abuse, how many high profile celebrities got away with heinous things, so many examples of the powerful (in their respective realm) never facing consequences.

So what actually ends up happening is most of this "public backlash" only affects people already easily accessible. Whether or not they actually did "act badly" which is important to bring up because people too easily buy into narratives online that are very one-sided. These easily accessible people could have been talked to 1 on 1 to solve the problem, that's how accessible they are.

I don't think banning this is the solution, but we absolutely do need to check this behavior and evaluate the incentives in place because right now they're terrible. The fact that people can profit off these kind of videos/posts on social media (two times btw: by the platform itself and if the story picks up by news orgs who pay for rights to display the content), especially during a time when people feel financial unease, is a recipe for disaster. Logically with these incentives in place, it makes far more sense to just be a bystander and film, rather than stepping in and helping or looking for help.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#28

Post by dustincoates »

nullindividual wrote: post #4

Social media truly is the opioid of today's society. While browsing /r/all, I ran across a post from a very popular sub which had an airport worker stripping in the airport, flailing on the floor, etc. No one knows why, could have been drugs, could have been a mental defect. Yet many of the thousands of responses were laughing because they could see the man's flaccid penis. While we don't know what caused the man to…

I know I'm not saying anything new here, but I'm always shocked by just how vicious the Reddit community is, especially from a group who considers themselves highly intelligent (compared to those "other" people). Videos like you describe are there every time I visit, along with fight videos and comments making up a back story as to what the victim did to deserve it, etc.

Sometimes I wonder why things like vigilanteism and other bad behaviors were so prevalent in the past, but then you go to these communities and realize it hasn't gone away, it's just moved online. Which, I guess is progress of a sort (less violence) and a big step backwards when you think about how in the past you could have moved away from a mistake or embarrassing encounter, but not anymore if it becomes viral enough.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#29

Post by madeofpalk »

blueflow wrote: post #8

The online shaming culture at tumblr, twitter and reddit was what convinced me that you need to stay pseudonymous on the internet at all cost. There are so many people that participate in this and haven't realized yet that they are being an asshole to random strangers.

Don’t try and pretend HN takes the moral high ground. This is something - regardless of how big of a problem you think it is - that permeates.

Once a month there will be a link to some GitHub or issue where everyone will pile on about some stupid issue.

Re: They didn’t ask to go viral

#30

Post by zgluck »

jsemrau wrote: post #19
BurningFrog wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like it or not, this is just the beginning. Fairly soon, all human life will be recorded.

There should be a right to be forgotten https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten

HN/YCombinator does not honor this correctly from a EU law perspective. They don't allow you to delete your content. What they do offer is renaming your account.

I'm salivating for this monster lawsuit once they they have enough EU exposure. It will probably be based in Germany.

@switch007: They are investing in European companies. That's exposure.

@walthamstow: Look up the "Right to erasure" aspect of the GDPR.

(Why am I adding these things as edits? - I was rate-limited by HN/Ycombinator so I can't reply to your individual comments. When trying to post a reply I get the message "please slow down".)

Post reply on HN